{"schema_version":"0.10.0","id":"LR-2026-0503","record_version":1,"title":"Alabama Supreme Court fines lawyer and tosses case over AI misuse","verification":{"human_verified":false,"method":"automated_gate","auto_verified":true,"score":47.6,"score_breakdown":{"source_authority":12.1,"independent_corroboration":7.0,"implicated_party_confirmed":0.0,"citation_integrity":14.0,"specificity":3.0,"completeness":4.16,"unhedged_language":5.0},"checks":{"schema_valid":true,"every_field_cited":true,"quotes_verbatim":true,"source_fetched":true,"distinct_incident":true,"dates_plausible":true,"sources_agree":true,"source_describes_incident":true,"severe_backed_by_source":true,"record_integrity":true,"eligible":true,"about_this_case":true},"gate_version":"gate-2026-10-18.7","cross_check_model":null,"cross_check_agreement":null,"duplicate_of":null,"verified_by":null,"verified_at":"2026-11-01","extraction_run_id":null,"evidence_level":{"level":"preliminary","reason":"Publisher not yet named · subject to change","original_document":null,"reports_total":1,"reports_independent":0,"reports_derivative":0,"developing":false,"disputed":false,"rules_version":"evidence-2026-10-29.1","computed_at":"2026-11-01","history":[{"date":"2026-11-01","from_level":null,"to_level":"preliminary","reason":"Publisher not yet named · subject to change"}]},"sources_hash":"0ddc860ef6e43345cb48af3726e5c181a6ac0a5924cecb8f39423e144b6fe519"},"system":{"model_name":null,"model_version":null,"developer":"unknown","harness":null,"tools_granted":[],"permissions_scope":null,"autonomy_level":"unknown","guardrails_present":[],"deployment_context":"unknown","tier":null,"lifecycle_stage":null,"integration_type":null,"intended_use":null,"safeguard_state":null,"production_intended":null},"event":{"date_occurred":null,"date_disclosed":"2026-04-27","incident_class":"hallucination","failure_class":null,"agent_involved":null,"secondary_failure_classes":[],"trigger":"unknown","duration":null,"detection_method":"human_review","summary":"The Alabama Supreme Court dismissed an appeal in Ibach v. Stewart after appeal briefs filed by attorney W. Perry Hall contained inaccurate citations spurred by AI hallucinations. The court found the briefs contained nonexistent or misquoted authorities, and that citations made after Hall declared his mistakes would not recur were also to cases that do not exist. The court attributed the problem to attorney negligence in checking AI-generated citations. Hall was ordered to pay $17,200 in attorneys' fees and costs, referred to the Alabama State Bar for potential discipline, and barred from filing in the court unless another attorney in good standing signs. The court and the opposing party spent significant time reviewing and responding to the fabricated authorities.","tags":[],"date_detected":null,"near_miss":null,"root_cause":"oversight","root_cause_detail":"attorney negligence in checking his or her work","failure_class_detail":null,"responsible_party":null,"adversarial_actor":null,"input_provenance":null,"time_to_contain":null,"operations_paused":null,"remediation":null,"precursor_events":null,"primary_risk":"RK14"},"impact":{"direct_loss_usd":17200.0,"remediation_hours":null,"records_exposed":null,"third_parties_affected_count":null,"severity":"minor","harm_class":["operational"],"affected_description":"The court and the opposing party","protected_class_involved":null,"data_categories_exposed":[],"loss_range_usd":null,"reversibility":null,"downstream_exposure_count":null},"evidence":{"sources":[{"url":"https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/alabama-justices-toss-case-over-egregious-attorney-ai-misuse","publisher":"Bloomberg Law News","date":"2026-04-27","type":"press","title":"Alabama Justices Toss Case Over ‘Egregious’ Attorney AI Misuse - Bloomberg Law News","archived_url":null,"attachment":"first_report"}],"per_field_confidence":{"event.incident_class":"C","event.root_cause":"C","event.root_cause_detail":"C","event.detection_method":"C","impact.direct_loss_usd":"C","impact.harm_class":"C","impact.affected_description":"C","context.industry":"C","impact.severity":"D","event.primary_risk":"D","event.summary":"C","system.autonomy_level":"D","system.deployment_context":"D","event.trigger":"D","context.country":"D","system.developer":"D","event.date_disclosed":"D","context.denominator_available":"D"},"field_citations":{"event.incident_class":[{"source_index":0,"quote":"The Alabama Supreme Court took the rare step of dismissing an appeal because of “grossly deficient” filings that relied on inaccurate citations spurred by AI hallucinations."}],"event.root_cause":[{"source_index":0,"quote":"The problem of fake citations in court filings is the result of attorneys failing to properly research and verify the results of AI-generated citations—in short, attorney negligence in checking his or her work,” the court said."}],"event.root_cause_detail":[{"source_index":0,"quote":"The problem of fake citations in court filings is the result of attorneys failing to properly research and verify the results of AI-generated citations—in short, attorney negligence in checking his or her work,” the court said."}],"event.detection_method":[{"source_index":0,"quote":"The court and the opposing party, involved in a family dispute over a living trust, “have wasted a significant amount of time and resources reviewing and responding to the fabricated legal authorities,” the majority said."}],"impact.direct_loss_usd":[{"source_index":0,"quote":"W. Perry Hall, a solo practitioner in Mobile, was ordered by the court to pay $17,200 in attorneys’ fees and costs."}],"impact.harm_class":[{"source_index":0,"quote":"The court and the opposing party, involved in a family dispute over a living trust, “have wasted a significant amount of time and resources reviewing and responding to the fabricated legal authorities,” the majority said."}],"impact.affected_description":[{"source_index":0,"quote":"The court and the opposing party, involved in a family dispute over a living trust, “have wasted a significant amount of time and resources reviewing and responding to the fabricated legal authorities,” the majority said."}],"context.industry":[{"source_index":0,"quote":"W. Perry Hall, a solo practitioner in Mobile, was ordered by the court to pay $17,200 in attorneys’ fees and costs."}],"impact.severity":[{"source_index":0,"quote":"The court and the opposing party, involved in a family dispute over a living trust, “have wasted a significant amount of time and resources reviewing and responding to the fabricated legal authorities,” the majority said."}],"event.summary":[{"source_index":0,"quote":"The Alabama Supreme Court took the rare step of dismissing an appeal because of “grossly deficient” filings that relied on inaccurate citations spurred by AI hallucinations."},{"source_index":0,"quote":"His briefs contained “nonexistent or misquoted authorities,” and provided purported quotations from “‘an out-of-state case which does not appear to exist,” the court said."},{"source_index":0,"quote":"Even though Hall declared in a reply brief that his mistakes “‘will not recur,’ the second and third citations after that declaration are to cases that do not exist,” the court said."},{"source_index":0,"quote":"The problem of fake citations in court filings is the result of attorneys failing to properly research and verify the results of AI-generated citations—in short, attorney negligence in checking his or her work,” the court said."},{"source_index":0,"quote":"W. Perry Hall, a solo practitioner in Mobile, was ordered by the court to pay $17,200 in attorneys’ fees and costs."},{"source_index":0,"quote":"The justices also referred him to the Alabama State Bar for potential discipline and prohibited him from filing “anything else in this Court” unless another attorney in good standing with the Alabama State Bar signs the filing."},{"source_index":0,"quote":"The court and the opposing party, involved in a family dispute over a living trust, “have wasted a significant amount of time and resources reviewing and responding to the fabricated legal authorities,” the majority said."}]},"notes_on_gaps":"The sources do not name the AI tool, model, vendor or deployment setting, so no system fields are given. No occurrence date, detection date or disclosure date is stated; the press header date 2026-04-27 was not used, and the case citation date 4/24/26 is used only as a timeline entry because it may not be the ruling date. Judgements: agent_involved is false because the sources describe a lawyer using AI for citations, not an autonomous agent, so no failure_class is given; root_cause oversight and responsible_party deployer are inferred from attorney negligence in checking the work; detection_method human_review is inferred from the court and opposing party reviewing the filings; severity minor because the harm stayed within one appeal and no data or systems of others are stated as touched; direct_loss_usd records a court-ordered fee and cost payment, which is a sanction rather than a measured loss; the risk and control I7 reflect the missing verification step described by the court; no remediation is stated, and court sanctions are not treated as system remediations; no country is stated in the sources, so context.country is omitted; autonomy level, guardrails, intended use and trigger are not stated. The record rests on one press article quoting the court; the court opinion itself was not provided. [case created by the backfill: read by claude-haiku-5-5, backfill-2026-11-01.2, 2026-11-01; not yet reviewed] [2026-11-01: evidence level set: Preliminary (Publisher not yet named · subject to change)]"},"context":{"industry":"legal services","org_size_band":null,"country":"unknown","denominator_available":false,"denominator":null,"related_incident_ids":[],"systemic_exposure":null,"shared_model_id":null,"upstream_incident_id":null,"incident_evidence":null,"regulatory":null,"coverage":null},"narrative":{"steps":[{"step":"went_wrong","text":"The briefs cited nonexistent or misquoted authorities, including an out-of-state case the court said does not appear to exist.","quote":"His briefs contained “nonexistent or misquoted authorities,” and provided purported quotations from “‘an out-of-state case which does not appear to exist,” the court said.","source_index":0,"grade":"C"},{"step":"reached","text":"The court and the opposing party spent significant time reviewing and responding to the fabricated authorities.","quote":"The court and the opposing party, involved in a family dispute over a living trust, “have wasted a significant amount of time and resources reviewing and responding to the fabricated legal authorities,” the majority said.","source_index":0,"grade":"C"},{"step":"caught","text":"The court found that citations made after Hall's reply-brief declaration that mistakes would not recur also did not exist.","quote":"Even though Hall declared in a reply brief that his mistakes “‘will not recur,’ the second and third citations after that declaration are to cases that do not exist,” the court said.","source_index":0,"grade":"C"}],"model":"claude-haiku-5-5","prompt_version":"backfill-2026-11-01.2","extracted_at":"2026-11-01","source_urls":["https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/alabama-justices-toss-case-over-egregious-attorney-ai-misuse"]},"analysis":{"sections":{"timeline":[{"text":"Hall declared in a reply brief that his mistakes would not recur; the court later found the next citations were to cases that do not exist.","quote":"Even though Hall declared in a reply brief that his mistakes “‘will not recur,’ the second and third citations after that declaration are to cases that do not exist,” the court said.","source_index":0,"when":null},{"text":"Ibach v. Stewart, No. SC-2025-0106, is dated 4/24/26 in the case citation.","quote":"The case is Ibach v. Stewart, 2026 BL 149309, Ala., No. SC-2025-0106, 4/24/26.","source_index":0,"when":"4/24/26"},{"text":"The court said the improper use of AI in the briefs was widespread and particularly egregious.","quote":"“The improper use of AI in the plaintiffs’ briefs was widespread and particularly egregious,” said the court Friday.","source_index":0,"when":"Friday"},{"text":"The justices referred Hall to the Alabama State Bar and barred him from filing unless another attorney in good standing signs.","quote":"The justices also referred him to the Alabama State Bar for potential discipline and prohibited him from filing “anything else in this Court” unless another attorney in good standing with the Alabama State Bar signs the filing.","source_index":0,"when":null}]},"model":"claude-haiku-5-5","prompt_version":"backfill-2026-11-01.2","extracted_at":"2026-11-01","source_urls":["https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/alabama-justices-toss-case-over-egregious-attorney-ai-misuse"]}}